- From: Marc Hadley <Marc.Hadley@Sun.COM>
- Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 12:42:16 -0400
- To: Asir Vedamuthu <asirveda@microsoft.com>
- Cc: Paul Cotton <paul.cotton@microsoft.com>, public-ws-policy@w3.org, Maryann Hondo <mhondo@us.ibm.com>, Bob Freund-Hitachi <bob.freund@hitachisoftware.com>
- Message-id: <DA0C0448-53ED-4E53-BEDC-D293A9059EA5@Sun.COM>
Its not entirely clear to me what the referenced text means, I could read it in one of two ways: (i) The policy embedded in the EPR is replaced by the attached policy (ii) The attached policy is somehow merged with the policy embedded in the EPR - i.e. the policy embedded in the EPR isn't in-scope wrt the policy attachment mechanisn but it is in-scope wrt WS-Addr semantics. Option (i) looks simpler but it seems to contradict WS-Addr which says: "A reference may contain metadata that describes the behavior, policies and capabilities of the endpoint." It would be good for the WS-Policy spec to be 100% explicit about this point. Thanks, Marc. On Aug 31, 2006, at 11:53 AM, Asir Vedamuthu wrote: > The example in Section 3.4 WS-PolicyAttachment [1] is illustrative. It > illustrates an extensibility point in the external policy attachment. > >> if the EPR contains a metadata element with an >> embedded wsp:Policy (either directly or via an >> intermediate embedded or referenced WSDL), >> how are the policies reconciled?" > > Here is what I see in the draft on this question: > > "For the purposes of attaching policy to a policy subject through this > mechanism, any policy expression contained inside of the wsp:AppliesTo > element MUST NOT be considered in scope. For example, an Endpoint > Reference may be used as a domain expression, and it may contain > policy > expressions within it, but this policy expressions are not > considered in > scope with respect to the wsp:PolicyAttachment element using it." > > [1] > http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2006/ws/policy/ws-policy- > attachment. > html?content-type=text/html;%20charset=utf-8#ExternalPolicyAttachment > > I hope this helps. > > Regards, > > Asir S Vedamuthu > Microsoft Corporation > > -----Original Message----- > From: public-ws-policy-request@w3.org > [mailto:public-ws-policy-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Paul Cotton > Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2006 1:52 PM > To: public-ws-policy@w3.org > Cc: Maryann Hondo; Marc.Hadley@Sun.COM; Bob Freund-Hitachi > Subject: Issue 3619 - input from WS-Addressing WG > > > Add an issue on coordination with other working groups > http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=3619 > > Maryann carried out her action to ask the WS-Addressing WG to > review the > example in Section 3.4 of WS-PolicyAttachments: > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-addressing/2006Aug/ > 0087.ht > ml > > We need to consider the questions asked by Marc Hadley in his response > to Maryann's request: > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-addressing/2006Aug/ > 0089.ht > ml > > "Have you considered the semantics when other things are included in > the EndpointReference. In particular, if the EPR contains a metadata > element with an embedded wsp:Policy (either directly or via an > intermediate embedded or referenced WSDL), how are the policies > reconciled?" > > WG members are encouraged to reply to this thread to help the WG to > reach consensus on how to reply to Marc's question. > > /paulc > > Paul Cotton, Microsoft Canada > 17 Eleanor Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K2E 6A3 > Tel: (613) 225-5445 Fax: (425) 936-7329 > mailto:Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com > > > > > > --- Marc Hadley <marc.hadley at sun.com> Business Alliances, CTO Office, Sun Microsystems.
Attachments
- application/pkcs7-signature attachment: smime.p7s
Received on Thursday, 31 August 2006 16:42:15 UTC